get_spot_margin_position_tiers

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose that this is a read-only operation, nor does it describe the response format, rate limits, or any side effects. The description is minimal.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short (one sentence plus parameter list) with no unnecessary words. It is efficient, though a bit more structure (e.g., noting the return type) would improve it.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and limited description, the tool's complete behavior is not conveyed. The nature of 'position tiers' and what data is returned remains unclear. Given the complexity of margin trading, this is insufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds 'Filter by currency (optional)' which is slightly more informative than the schema's title and default, but does not explain what values are valid or the effect of filtering.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Get spot margin position tiers.' clearly states the action (get) and the resource (spot margin position tiers). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_spot_margin_coin_state, but does not explicitly differentiate beyond the resource name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_spot_margin_max_borrowable or get_spot_margin_status. Only mentions an optional currency filter, but no context on prerequisites or typical use cases.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.